MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159525389 · doi:10.1108/he-02-2021-0023

Education-smoking gradient and upstream health policies: comparing Generation X with millennials

2021· article· en· W3159525389 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maryam Dilmaghani

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusOriginalityUpstream (networking)Consumption (sociology)Health educationPsychologyEnvironmental healthSociologyMedicineEconomicsEconomic growthSocial psychologyHealth careSocial scienceComputer sciencePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Over the years, many upstream health policies have sought to reduce smoking across populations. While smoking has been substantially reduced, the effects of these policies on education-smoking gradient remain unclear. The present paper compares the education-smoking gradient among the Generation X and the millennials, who grew up with different types of upstream policies. Design/methodology/approach The study relies on regression analysis. The data are from the Canadian Tobacco, Alcohol and Drugs Survey of 2017, with the sample restricted to those born between 1965 and 1995. Findings At the zero-order, the education-smoking gradient has not significantly flattened from Generation X to millennials. And, accounting for the channels of impact of education on smoking does not substantially change this pattern. Social implications The implications for health inequalities associated with socioeconomic status, and tobacco consumption reduction policies, are discussed. Originality/value This paper is the first study of the kind using Canadian data.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth EducationSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207